Divorce

[agedman]

A former pastor is drawing SS benefits, but is limited by the "special needs" of his oldest daughter (down syndrome) who receives a great amount from the family benefits for her support. She gets approximately 2/3rds of the typical retirement benefits the SS awards under the family plan. So their own living expenses are not covered, and they must also further supplement her because there is no condition in which she can be independently living.

He found out that if he and his wife get divorced, the wife would get full benefits which would allow for the total income into the family to be raised. Therefore, the lose currently suffered under the SS family plan would be much less than it currently is.

They have consulted with multiple estate planning and specialists in the SS, and each has given the following suggestion:

Get divorced.

Here in the states, the marriage is both a Spiritual vow taking, and a legal signature and witnesses on a license.

Should this former pastor and wife divorce (by the state legal system) and yet remain married in the eyes of God?

Would you view this as being deceitful in order to "bilk" the government out of money?

Would you view this a legal and a way to get the compensation that is rightfully theirs?

Your thoughts?

 

[Yeshua1]

A former pastor is drawing SS benefits, but is limited by the "special needs" of his oldest daughter (down syndrome) who receives a great amount from the family benefits for her support. She gets approximately 2/3rds of the typical retirement benefits the SS awards under the family plan. So their own living expenses are not covered, and they must also further supplement her because there is no condition in which she can be independently living.

He found out that if he and his wife get divorced, the wife would get full benefits which would allow for the total income into the family to be raised. Therefore, the lose currently suffered under the SS family plan would be much less than it currently is.

They have consulted with multiple estate planning and specialists in the SS, and each has given the following suggestion:

Get divorced.

Here in the states, the marriage is both a Spiritual vow taking, and a legal signature and witnesses on a license.

Should this former pastor and wife divorce (by the state legal system) and yet remain married in the eyes of God?

Would you view this as being deceitful in order to "bilk" the government out of money?

Would you view this a legal and a way to get the compensation that is rightfully theirs?

Your thoughts?

Would doing that be really trusting in the Lord to somehow provide though?

 

[agedman]

Would doing that be really trusting in the Lord to somehow provide though?

Would this not be a solution provided by the
Lord?

 

[Yeshua1]

Would this not be a solution provided by the
Lord?

Could be, but seems like doing a deal when Abraham told a half lie about his wife being his sister!

 

[TCassidy]

What authority does government have to decide who is married and who isn't and who may marry whom?

Prior to the 17th century there were no government issued marriage licenses. Marriage was either a contract between two families, two people, or a function of the church.

Without marriage licenses is anyone suggesting nobody prior to the 17th century were ever really married in God's eyes?

If two people make a lifelong commitment to each other are they not married in God's eyes?

 

[Rob_BW]

So it hinges on the ethics of drawing a benefit set up or scaled for the divorced/single parent while still considering yourself "married in the eyes of the Lord."

 

[MartyF]

Would you view this as being deceitful in order to "bilk" the government out of money?

Yes

 

[TCassidy]

So it hinges on the ethics of drawing a benefit set up or scaled for the divorced/single parent while still considering yourself "married in the eyes of the Lord."

Should married couples be discriminated against?

 

[Salty]

Married couples often have positive discrimination
ie - 1- ticket $ 50
2 - tickets $85

 

[Dave G]

I hate divorce...probably why I never got married.
To me, the marriage vow is sacred, and my treatment of it before God is a duty I am not allowed to treat lightly.

Having a nice lady that was actually Scripturally available ( single, never-married sisters don't exactly grow on trees ) was another factor in me not getting married ( thus far ), as divorce is the breaking of an earthly covenant between a man and a woman...a covenant made for life ( Romans 7:1-3 )...a covenant that is a picture of Christ's unending love for the church.

Would you view this as being deceitful in order to "bilk" the government out of money?

To answer the OP's question: YES.


No, do not divorce, no matter the "benefits". Don't get married for earthly benefits, either....Marry in obedience to the Lord and trust Him to handle the details, including financial ones.

Divorce only as a last-resort of a spouse who breaks those vows by engaging in "activities" that are reserved for the covenant of marriage.

I don't agree with divorce and re-marriage, either, unless the original married couple gets back together.

 

[tyndale1946]

What authority does government have to decide who is married and who isn't and who may marry whom?

Prior to the 17th century there were no government issued marriage licenses. Marriage was either a contract between two families, two people, or a function of the church.

Without marriage licenses is anyone suggesting nobody prior to the 17th century were ever really married in God's eyes?

If two people make a lifelong commitment to each other are they not married in God's eyes?

I agree with TC the deceit is not in the couple wanting benefits for their child... I have two handicapped children I know... It is a horrible thing that the state punishes the child and withholds benefits because it doesn't fit their law they made but sometimes they don't abide by the laws they made... Would wanting for the welfare of your child be a sin?... They paid into SS and yet the state say to reap the SS you paid into and get the benefits for your child you must be divorced?... They are still married in Gods eyes because God knows the whole story and not just the state side... If the state would do their part they wouldn't have to get divorced... Brother Glen

 

[Rob_BW]

Should married couples be discriminated against?

Before I answer that, I must admit that changing AFDC to cover unwed parents instead of widows/widowers has seemed to have led to an exponential increase in unwed parents. So care must be given when mapping out our nation's safety net, lest we encourage behavior that we don't want.

I had an uncle who was never married to his second wife. As far as I understood it, they wouldn't have been able to make it without the social security payments she received from being a widow. So I'm not unfamiliar with these situations.

But it seems deceitful to me to declare before the church that you're married in the eyes of God, and then mark down unmarried on a government form.

So, I would hope that the safety net could find a way to assist those in need without seemingly punishing behavior that we as a country should encourage, like having children within the institution of marriage.

 

[MartyF]

Should married couples be discriminated against?

no

Should single men be discriminated against?

 

[TCassidy]

But it seems deceitful to me to declare before the church that you're married in the eyes of God, and then mark down unmarried on a government form.

Render the things of Caesar unto Caesar and the things of God unto God.

If a person is married in the eyes of God and not married in the eyes of Caesar, that is Caesar's problem, not God's.

Do you recognize two gays who are married to each other because the state issued a marriage license?

If not your position is the same as mine.

 

[canadyjd]

It's deceitful. Let each person be convinced in their own mind. I believe such action would grieve Holy Spirit indwelling and could lead to worse.

 

[MartyF]

Render the things of Caesar unto Caesar and the things of God unto God.

If a person is married in the eyes of God and not married in the eyes of Caesar, that is Caesar's problem, not God's.

Do you recognize two gays who are married to each other because the state issued a marriage license?

If not your position is the same as mine.

So if I want to “fake” marry a man because I’m getting paid to provide him citizenship papers, lying to the government about it is alright.

It is also alright to lie to my employer and have have my employer pay for my fake spouse as well.

It’s also alright . . . .

Marty

 

[TCassidy]

So if I want to “fake” marry a man because I’m getting paid to provide him citizenship papers, lying to the government about it is alright.

Does God recognize the marriage? And by "fake" marrying you mean you intend to lie about it?

It is also alright to lie to my employer and have have my employer pay for my fake spouse as well.

It looks to me as if your problem is more than God recognizing your marriage. It looks to me as if your problem is that you are a pathological liar.

 

[MartyF]

Does God recognize the marriage? And by "fake" marrying you mean you intend to lie about it?

It looks to me as if your problem is more than God recognizing your marriage. It looks to me as if your problem is that you are a pathological liar.

Could you re-read what you posted?

If a person is married in the eyes of God and not married in the eyes of Caesar, that is Caesar's problem, not God's.

You argued that the couple should lie to and decieve our government - not me. However, since you don’t like my hypotheticals it seems like you are coming around to agreeing that decieving the government is not appropriate.

Marty

 

[TCassidy]

You argued that the couple should lie to and decieve our government -

No, I didn't.

 

[TCassidy]

agreeing that decieving the government is not appropriate.

Who suggested deceiving (correct spelling) the government?

The people are married in God's eyes. The people are NOT married in the governments eyes. The government asks them if they are married according to the governments definition of marriage. They agree with the government that, according to the governments definition, they are not married.

But according to God's definition, "one man, one woman, one lifetime" they are married.

Nobody has lied to anyone. Nobody has suggested lying to anyone.